XV FREEDOM OF SPEECH 369 



in the well-known Foote case. Discussion, he said, 

 could be carried on effectually without deliberate 

 wounding of others' feelings. 



As he wrote in reply to an appeal for help in this 

 case (March 12, 1883):— 



I have not read the writings for which Mr. Foote was 

 prosecuted. But, unless their nature has been grossly 

 misrepresented, I cannot say that I feel disposed to inter- 

 vene on his behalf. 



I am ready to go great lengths in defence of freedom 

 of discussion, but I decline to admit that rightful freedom 

 is attacked, when a man is prevented from coarsely and 

 brutally insulting his neighbours' honest beliefs. 



I would rather make an effort to get legal penalties 

 inflicted with equal rigour on some of the anti-scientific 

 blasphemers — who are quite as coarse and unmannerly in 

 their attacks on opinions worthy of all respect as Mr. Foote 

 can possibly have been. 



The grand result of his determination not to com- 

 promise where truth was concerned, was the securing 

 freedom of thought and speech. One man after 

 another, looking back on his work, declares that if we 

 can say what we think now, it is because he fought 

 the battle of freedom. Not indeed the battle of 

 toleration, if toleration means toleration of error for 

 its own sake. Error, he thought, ought to be extir- 

 pated by all legitimate means, and not assisted because 

 it is conscientiously held. 



As Lord Hobhouse wrote, soon after his death : — 



I see now many laudatory notices of him in papers. 

 But I have not seen, and I think the younger men 

 do not know, that which (apart fiom science) I should 



VOL. Ill 2 B 



